Monday, June 18, 2007

Revamping the process

The NHR has an article today on the proposed investigation (by Luther Turmelle). It leads:

The decision not to reappoint Water Pollution Control Authority Chairman Tim Pelton is part of a Democratic strategy to make municipal commissions more friendly to development, a Republican councilman said Friday. Councilman David Schrumm said the decision not to reappoint Pelton is evidence that "the majority party on the council has been co-opted by the development community."
Regardless, if the Council does conduct an investigation, much of it may come down to this:
When the council appoints an individual to a board or commission, the council secretary submits the paperwork to (Town Clerk Carolyn) Soltis, but Soltis said she isn't responsible for notifying the council when an individual is nearing the end of his or her term. "That's not part of my job," she said, but is the responsibility of the Democratic and Republican town committees. Hall said the controversy over reappointments illustrates the need to consider revamping the appointment process.
I'm not sure how far reaching this proposed investigation may be, but I agree that the Council should consider revamping the appointment process. After all, it seems the Council relies almost entirely on a document taken from a source (the town website) that is fraught with inaccuracies.

Tim White
Town Council, 4th District

26 comments:

Anonymous said...

So George W Schrumm wants to appoint only citizens who are anit deveopment to the boards and commissions-I get it as long as they are in agreement with him they are ok

Anonymous said...

What is funny about Mr. Schrumm's statement is that as far as I knew Mr. Pelton never stated what his position on the North End was. Also, is North End the reason that they wanted him reappointed and lied and cheated to do it?

One last question, how many Dems did the last council reappoint?

Anonymous said...

Schrumm is going to do anything to try to stop the north end and if this means being dishonest or doing dishonest things he will. He is out in the open about it and the NH "Register article is the proof.

Anonymous said...

Would this mean that mr Schrumm's equal and opposite tactic be to only appoint men and women who are against the north end? That is the way it sounds to me.

Anonymous said...

I'm a Democrat and I'm disgusted at how this local party is being run by the developers.

They act just like the Republican National party, by using name calling, accusing people of shenanigans, denying information on the Northend, and supporting the developer's campaign of silencing any opposition to their development of the Northend. They seem to have no limit as to what they will do to push the W/S, Bowman and Calcagni development thru. Discredit Pelton or anyone that could possibly have integrity to stand up to the developers by stating the truth.


If this change to the Town Conservation and Development Plan is pushed through, it will have been through politics not on any impact information or for what is good for the town.

Party of the people? That's a joke.

Anonymous said...

OK Dave

Anonymous said...

As a lifelong republican I am ashamed of the sneaky tactics of the GOP
from bush to Scurumm they have made a mockery of the town state and fed govt.
I am not happy and I will vote for the best next time
Hint:it wont be a republican

Anonymous said...

wait wait wait..isn't the only relevant question: did someone try and change a commissioner's end date? Did someone try and subvert the process?

Anonymous said...

Oh yea someone did
Who was it and why did they do it

Anonymous said...

This is getting silly. By the time this proposal gets to the local commissions it will be years. To insinuate that one person on one commission holds the deciding vote for this proposal is ludicrous. If this is so, then the whole process needs to be investigated. This is all politics. The citizens of Cheshire get short changed when everything is controlled by one group. There needs to be some questions once in a while, if not why do we have a council? Go Mr. Schrumm.

Anonymous said...

9:00AM I don't understand your comment regarding Mr. Schrumm being dishonest and being out in the open about it. It's a contradition. I don't always agree with Mr. Schrumm but we definitely need some checks and balances when it comes to this proposal. We have too many people in town pushing this through with no regard for the town (schools, infrastructure, tax base, etc.) If Mr. Schrumm is providing this needed oversight then I support him in this endeavor. There are many in town who do not realize what is being proposed. I spoke to two individuals this past weekend who weren't aware this included residential. When they found out they were against it. There should be some informative articles in the Herald not just propaganda.

Anonymous said...

I'm just dreaming out loud here, but I wish there was a run-down of each Council member and their professed North-End positions (p&z as well?) and maybe a blurb on development in general. When it's not your primary passion, it can be so much more time-consuming to keep track of local politics. There's a wealth of info out there on national elected officials, but the local stuff requires a good deal more footwork and first-hand knowledge. It's just a different sort of animal, but boy, it would sure be nice to get a play by play for a big issue like this.

Anonymous said...

http://timwhitelistens.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

I am a lifelong Democrat but I have to say this posturing on the part of the Dem's has a destinctive odor to it. I've been upset with the Dem's and the way they have been in the back pocket of this developer since the start. If this was put out to a townwide vote asking if we should have this project with or without residential. Without residential would win hands down.

Anonymous said...

What do people have against residential? Don't you like people? It will not add much to the schools but it could add a great deal to our stock of housing options. It just sounds so small town (ie bigoted) to not want people!

Anonymous said...

This is not the issue. Once you allow this mixed use, we basically have no zoning. Think about it. Residential costs more period. It has nothing to do with not wanting people. Also there are no restrictions to the residential ask the developer he can't make up his mind (apt, condo, garden apt etc)they can build what they want. Good idea in the center of a town.

Anonymous said...

8:03PM Who doesn't like people? It's a matter of dollars and cents. Residential is ultimately a tax loss. Not add much to our schools. Who says? The builder is talking about 3 story apartment complexes. That doesn't include what will be built on the other 300 acres. You don't think there will be any children? Right now our school budget is almost 70% of our total town budget. Residential is a loss no matter how you look at it. This is the only project this developer has done that has included residential. Why is he doing it here? I wonder? Maybe because the most money to be made on this project will be from the residential? Commercial property cost a great deal less thus more profit. Cheshire has plenty of residential land available. The zoning should not be changed to include residential.

Anonymous said...

Tim, You say the town website is fraut with inaccuracies. Isn't it odd to anyone that the dems just picked out the inaccurate date for Pelton? Why didn't they bring all the other errors out in the open and claim that they were part of this supposed shenanigans?

Anonymous said...

Thanks 9:14 for again trying to explain the residential issue. Don't know why people have such a hard time realizing that residential should be excluded. They think it only involves 160 units but they're not looking at the big (400 acre) picture.

Anonymous said...

"This is the only project this developer has done that has included residential. Why is he doing it here? I wonder? "

Why has W/S said repeatedly that the residential is not that important to them, only to come back and say it is needed?

Maybe the current owners, Bowman and Calcagni want the residential. Remember Bowman wanted to put up 200 units where Whole foods is and after he took the town to court and lost the property ended up with Whole Foods.

And don't forget about the other 300 acres. Do we know who owns them and whether a number of similar deals are just waiting in the wings? Have any other mall builders approached the town? Let's get the names of the owners and stop them from hiding behind LLC names. Once we know the names we might understand a lot of what has been happening.

Anonymous said...

Is the vote 7/11/07?

Anonymous said...

Good question. Who knows? When the Town council voted on this it was not televised????? The vote was 6 to 3. Who read the minutes? I hope this date is well published and many attend so we can hear what the reasons are given for their vote. It will be interesting to see if they heard what the people said and questioned. This is a bad time of the year for everyone( vacation). How sad.

Anonymous said...

Look at all other large developments. They all take up every inch of surounding space. That's what will happen to the other 300 acres eventually and more residential with industrial/commercial in other parts of town. They allowed it in the northend why not here? They will win in court.....

Anonymous said...

What ever happened to Westfield? They were at the first open meeting and returned for the second with all kinds of consultants. After that nothing, and the complaining against Westfield stopped. Was a deal made to allow them to build another mall on some part of the remaining 300 acres? Funny that the Brass City Mall, Hamden Plaza and Hamden Mart mall operators didn't say one word against the W/S proposal. Hamden Plaza and Hamden Mart as well as the town of Hamden ran an expensive campaign against the New Haven mall and won. What is different this time? Since they are all out of space to expand, the 300 acres could be just what they are looking for.

Could it be that they will all get a piece of the action?

Anonymous said...

Do you think we will have the Westfield Shoppes in Chehsire?

Anonymous said...

Tim Pelton is a good person and I don’t believe that he had anything to do with this mess, but you might find the following of interest:

A few years ago Republican Keith Robertson resigned from the town council. The Republican nominating committee recommended Sandy Mouris. David Schrumm said no, he wanted TIM PELTON and he said he would NOT support anyone else.

Coincidence? Nothing to do with the present situation?

I doubt it.